Without a great deal of attention, one of the world's largest peacekeeping missions is starting to unwind. Since early 2000, U.N. peacekeepers have labored in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, attempting to end one of the world's bloodiest recent conflicts. At its height, the U.N. mission involved more than 20,000 troops and hundreds of civilians and police from dozens of countries. By U.N. standards, it was an expensive undertaking, with a price tag of more than a billion dollars a year (by the standards of U.S. or NATO operations in Iraq or Afghanistan, of course, it was dirt cheap). It has also been bloody. Three peacekeepers were killed recently and more than 100 have died in the course of the operation.

Click to expand...

Congolese president Joseph Kabila recently demanded that the U.N. force withdraw entirely by 2011, and the Security Council has authorized a smaller and renamed follow-on force. Some U.N. forces have already withdrawn. It has not been a smooth transition. With recent reports of a mass rapes in eastern Congo still reverberating, the U.N. is once again being charged with fecklessness and worse. "Hapless UN fails another test," one typical headline read.

Click to expand...

First, she insisted that, for all its evident shortcomings, the U.N. force helped keep the country in one piece. What was a riven country is now for the most part unified, although the government clearly does not control swathes of eastern Congo. She credits international peacekeepers and diplomats with facilitating that unification process and restraining some of the worst violence. "The situation in the country would have been much worse without the peacekeepers," she says. Even in still violent eastern Congo, the peacekeepers have at times and in places been able to protect civilian populations from rampaging militias.

Click to expand...

Thoughts USMB? Due to copyright, couldn't post the whole thing so I recommend reading the other side of the negative aspects of what had occurred in Congo.

At the end of the day however, I do believe that the U.N did more good than bad and their being there at the end of the day ended up being better than it could of ended.

Thoughts USMB? Due to copyright, couldn't post the whole thing so I recommend reading the other side of the negative aspects of what had occurred in Congo.

At the end of the day however, I do believe that the U.N did more good than bad and their being there at the end of the day ended up being better than it could of ended.

Click to expand...

Herp derp on your part there.

#2: You didn't post a opinion about the article, you continued your obsession with me. ConHog, I say this from the bottom of my heart, find another hobby to occupy some of your free time. All of this time on USMB isn't very healthy for you.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!